Monday, January 25th 2021
Corsair's Upcoming MP600 PRO Gen4 SSD Promises Speeds of 7 GB/s
The Corsair MP600 PRO Gen4 (CSSD-F1000GBMP600PRO) was recently spotted on Amazon Germany before being taken down. The MP600 PRO is the successors to Corsair's MP600 SSD featuring Phison's second-generation PCIe 4.0 PS5018-E18 SSD controller and boasting sequential read/write speeds of up to 7000 MB/s, and 6850 MB/s respectively. These are some very significant generational speed improvements over the already blazing fast advertised read/write speeds of the MP600 at 4950 MB/s and 4250 MB/s.
The drive is also listed as carrying a warranty of 3,600 TBW which is likely for the 2 TB model. These new second-generation PCIe 4.0 SSDs are nearing the limits of the PCIe 4.0 x4 interface which offers maximum speeds of ~8000 MB/s. It should also be noted that these performance improvements offer very limited practical benefits to the end-user in typical use-cases over a basic PCIe 3.0 NVMe drive. Pricing and availability for the drive were not published but we expect Corsair to officially announce the drive soon.
Sources:
@momomo_us, Amazon Germany, FCCID.IO
The drive is also listed as carrying a warranty of 3,600 TBW which is likely for the 2 TB model. These new second-generation PCIe 4.0 SSDs are nearing the limits of the PCIe 4.0 x4 interface which offers maximum speeds of ~8000 MB/s. It should also be noted that these performance improvements offer very limited practical benefits to the end-user in typical use-cases over a basic PCIe 3.0 NVMe drive. Pricing and availability for the drive were not published but we expect Corsair to officially announce the drive soon.
39 Comments on Corsair's Upcoming MP600 PRO Gen4 SSD Promises Speeds of 7 GB/s
its useless pay more even if speed raising even double that....even 10000..
WE WANT MORE SPACE!
speed read 3500 , write speed can be half lower, but so what,but space should be 4tb to 15tb... at least 8tb
yes
The lowest density drives are always the slowest, it's been like that for years.
Obviously different controllers have different sweet spots for where you get the best performance. When 1TB was the sweet spot, 500GB drives had much slower IOPS and the 2TB models tended to be slower than the 1TB models, if only marginally so.
There's really no difference here, except the base model is now 1TB instead of 500GB.
WD uses their own controller and they start at 500GB, so obviously their 1TB model is going to perform better, as it is the sweet spot for their controller.
Having the right hardware and software helps as well if testing and comparison is the objective. If you want to visually see difference in a more glaring way using conventional VSYNC and not adaptive VSYNC, GSYNC, or FreeSync is most ideal and at the highest possible refresh rate and frame rate in a game that is micro stutter sensitive. Due the amount the amount of stream data combined with the higher hardware demands you'll notice the visual impact the most in the right game titles that stream lots of data from storage into memory rather than preloading most of it into memory ahead of time minimizing access latency and random I/O frame render issues which are queue depth sensitive based on scene complexity and what's in memory already versus what needs to be transfer into it.
Testing methodologies and error of margin make testing and comparing solid state devices for in game performance impacts against each other extremely difficult in practice. The disparity gap of the devices adds to the challenge the smaller it is as opposed to the wider it is much like testing a HDD against NVME is going to be more readily obvious. It's not simply the storage adding to the complexity and testing and pin pointing readily transparent differences though. Lower the refresh rate and FPS averages and you'll have a harder time spotting things than you would otherwise likewise if you obscure and minimize readily obvious slow downs forms of adaptive sync and such rather than the more jarring traditional VSYNC you'd be more hard pressed to spot it visually. Error of margin makes it a challenge as well especially when storage performance for micro stutter contend and overlap with each other pretty heavily. As storage performance and display tech and other hardware improves it might be easier to spot and pinpoint though. All things considered with error of margin it might be best slow down the rest of the system outside of the storage to get a better picture with less "error of margin" fluctuation coming into play impacting results is my conclusion. In the big picture storage doesn't have a enormous impact on FPS averages, 1%'s, and 0.1%'s.
I am going to secure erase this drive and use it as a 'slow' data storage, WD Black sn850 as system now.
I am curious about one thing - why do Gen3 drives top out at 3.5 GB/s, and Gen4 drives top out at 7 GB/s? Max throughput is just under 4 and 8 GB/s respectively, right?
forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?s=7f70fda07bcdd1bb726da08525909a9d&t=189618
I've already posted this on page 1.
So most people stick to Sata SSD for game storage.
Motherboard only has two M2 slots and one is being used as the OS drive using the SSD mounts are perfect this machine has no spinning drives in it as I have a NAS on the network.